AVATARTS FOR THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE AS THE ESSENCE OF DEVELOPMENT (Original)

10 

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Texto completo

(1)

84 Original

AVATARTS FOR THE CONCEPT OF CULTURE AS THE ESSENCE OF DEVELOPMENT

Avatares para el concepto de cultura como la esencia del desarrollo

M. Sc. Silvio Alejandro Alcívar-Molina. Universidad Técnica de Manabí, Ecuador.

salcivarmolina@gmail.com

Dra. C. Odalis Margarita Gómez-Gómez. Profesora Titular, Universidad de Granma, Cuba,

ogomezg@udg.co.cu

Recibido: 26/04/2018 – Aceptado: 24/05/2018

ABSTRACT

In this thought line, the Cultural Studies have contributed to the analysis of the paper of the

culture in the development of our societies. That which means to locate the cultural dimension of

the development in a system of social relationships that transcends the economic and political

environments. It is a critical perspective of the culture like indispensable requirement then for the

solution of problems corresponding to the environment of the economy and of the politics. In that

way, the culture is view like generating of economic resources as long as the production and the

cultural consumption participate in the social development. And with it the idea of well-being

becomes the support of cultural processes based on the human being dignificación.

Key words: culture, development, cultural management.

RESUMEN

En esta línea de pensamiento, los Estudios Culturales han contribuido al análisis del papel de la

cultura en el desarrollo de nuestras sociedades. Eso significa ubicar la dimensión cultural del

desarrollo en un sistema de relaciones sociales que trasciende los entornos económicos y

políticos. Es una perspectiva crítica de la cultura como requisito indispensable entonces para la

solución de problemas correspondientes al entorno de la economía y de la política. De esa

forma, la cultura se ve como generadora de recursos económicos siempre que la producción y

el consumo cultural participen en el desarrollo social. Y con ello la idea de bienestar se

convierte en el soporte de procesos culturales basados en la dignificación del ser humano.

(2)

85 INTRODUCTION

The cultural conception of development places us necessarily in the link between culture and

development. Culture from this perspective is an instrument of knowledge and social praxis,

which as a process forms the social subject as a reflective critical receiver, creator and

transformer of its socio-cultural reality, in contexts that, by politics, fully form its citizens,

contributing to its development personological and sociocultural. From the presence of culture

as a basis for development emerge contradictions that are not based on solid epistemological

arguments, based on different approaches "not only does it not figure in the priorities of the

political agendas, but it does not occur in the consciousness of the populations that they still

consider culture as a decorative element or a superfluous expense "(Olmos, 2004) and on the

other hand it is the essence culture of development as a creative, cognitive and social process,

as a result of the history of humanity that has generated in its to become cultural products in

each town.

The idea of culture as a resource seen from the prism of the socio-historical conditions of

cultural activity allows us to evaluate each practice in its social resizing. In this perspective,

Yúdice (2006) observes the notion of culture in its use as a need within the framework of social

development for the solution of problems corresponding to the field of economics and politics in

the global era.

DEVELOPMENT

Culture, understood as the long and complex process of creation, production and reproduction

of human activity, with the aim of satisfying their needs, whose experiences are treasured and

transmitted by generational continuity, is at the same time the platform, where they develop the

different historical epochs, with their peculiarities of material and spiritual character. Culture

structures in its dialectical unity, the material and the spiritual, which is distinctive to each

concrete historical period.

The essential nucleus of culture is in education, in any of its historical forms, insofar as it allows

men and women, from the earliest ages, to assimilate and assume the basic elements of the

culture in which they were born, that Cultural appropriation is the basis and tool for their vital

learning, and even prepares their transition from mere assimilators of culture to producers of

cultures, active creators of their own life, in contributors and transmitters of personal, group,

(3)

86 culture and education, although they are not identical, do belong to the same

theoretical-conceptual order.

Any social revolution that claims to be true in its scope and purposes, must necessarily consider

among its main factors of change, profound transformations in education and culture. These

changes must be of such a nature, that they constitute revolutions, within the revolution.

After the Second World War (1945), and specifically from the establishment of the Organization

for Education, Science and Culture of the United Nations (UNESCO), the development category

acquires relevance in the scientific community.

Culture, as a sociological category, has been investigated by different authors, which reveal the

relationship of different conceptions of culture as the essence of development. Although there

are differences in the models that contribute to the understanding of this category; The value of

culture as a space for individual growth is seen as a common aspect, as a result of the active

and participative development of the subject in his relationship with others, in a way that

constitutes a necessary category to assess the progress and results of the social subject, of

which valuable qualities and values linked to the development of society are required.

Considered culture as a resource, it leads to a type of management, which is neither

characteristic of the definitions of high culture nor of everyday culture in its anthropological

sense. In this context, cultural management as a process has always existed, whether based on

an elitist conception of culture (reduced to art and literature), or a broader one such as that

formulated by UNESCO (1982) when considering it as the "Set of the distinctive, spiritual and

material, intellectual and emotional features that characterize a society or a social group" so

"encompasses, in addition to the arts and letters, ways of life, fundamental rights to human

beings, value systems, traditions and beliefs. " In its axiological sense, somehow explicit or

implicit, conscious or not, we act to impose the world of meanings that corresponds to the mode

of production that is dominant in society.

About:

The social, the economic, the political intervene in the cultural process, and overlap to produce

senses, from processes of symbolic elaboration that in turn will produce, in a concrete way, the

conceptions of the world and the subsequent conditions of life of the different individuals and

social groups. (Zavarce, 2010: 285)

(4)

87 (...) "cultural action has become a resource at the service of different social and political

movements, from which transformations can be managed to improve situations such as

violence, disintegration in different communities as a result of displacement by wars , famine,

search for job opportunities, etc. "(Zavarse, 2010: 284)

The fact that culture is found through a vital network of discourses that impacts the expectations

of the recipient, contributing to their formation of values with development to the sociocultural

dynamic, acquiring meaning and meaning, enhancing the referential value of culture in

development.

However, it happens that "it is very common that a concept of culture similar to that of UNESCO

is stated on the platforms but that, in practice, everything goes to arts and shows". (Olmos 2008:

59), in correspondence with the articulation of globalizing references present in societies. In this

regard, it is emphasized that "the role of culture and art in the development of our societies is

today posed, on the one hand, as a need of an ideological nature, and on the other, as a

requirement of the development of relationships social production; that is, as a requirement of

economic development itself "(Hart, 1986: 52). Here, it is clarified that culture as a resource is

much more than a commodity, since it constitutes the axis of a new epistemic framework where

ideology and a good part of what Foucault called a disciplinary society (for example, the

inculcation of norms in institutions such as education, medicine, psychiatry, etc.) are absorbed

within an economic or ecological rationality, so that in the culture (and in its results)

management, conservation, access, distribution and investment have priority. (Yúdice, 2002)

Hence, the role of culture has expanded unprecedentedly to the political and economic sphere,

while conventional notions of culture have been considerably emptied. Instead of focusing on

the content of culture-this is the model of honor or distinction or hierarchy of classes offered in

its traditional meanings, or its more recent anthropologization as an integral lifestyle (Williams),

according to which it is recognized that the culture of each one has value-it may be more

convenient to address the issue of culture, in our time, characterized by rapid globalization,

considering it as a resource.

In this sense, there is a growing use of culture as an instrument for both sociopolitical and

economic improvement, that is, for progressive participation in this era marked by declining

political commitments, conflicting about citizenship (Young, 2000).

In this scenario, the most openly productive aspects of the cultural studies project will be valued

(5)

88 dissociation too often practiced between culture and society . For him, culture designates an

entire way of life (the common meanings) and designates the arts and knowledge (essential

processes of discovery and creative effort). "Culture" is not a practice; nor is it simply the

descriptive sum of the "habits and customs" of societies, as it tends to become in certain types

of anthropology. It is imbricated with all social practices, and is the sum of its interrelations. This

solves the question of what is studied and how, "culture" becomes all those patterns of

organization, those characteristic forms of human energy that can be detected revealing - "in

unexpected identities and correspondences", as well as in "discontinuities of unforeseen type"

in, or under, all social practices.

The idea of resistance is found in Latin America where Cultural Studies has been developed by

NéstorGarcíaCanclini. Both in the search for the specificity of Latin American cultural studies to

differentiate them from the same current in Anglo-Saxon countries make culture itself a political

issue, granting a prominent role to new movements in the formation of popular culture. They are

interested in the cultural significance of symbolism and identity, above the control of the

productive forces, where the articulation of the dialectical triad of interpretation, explanation and

understanding are essential.

For the Cuban ethnographer Fernando Ortiz "Culture is like cultivation, work, cultivation, sowing

for harvest and fruit ... it is something structural ... it is a mechanism of integral cooperation ... it

is a system of instruments, habits, desires, ideas and institutions by means of which each

human group tries to adjust to its environment .... And to improve your satisfaction of your

personal needs ... always growing. Culture is not luxury, but a necessity. It is not a

contemplation but an energy ... It is not a passivist neutrality but an active militancy ... It is not a

wonted quiet that is enjoyed but a restlessness that must be satisfied without ceasing. "

At present, three dimensions of the word "culture" (the anthropological-social, the

ideological-aesthetic, the political-institutional) are valued, which can be mixed in a complementary manner

or alternatively polemically contrasted in the analysis of how the words are expressed. symbolic

imaginaries, according to the way in which these analyzes prefer to place the accent, either in

the role of the ethos that fixes the social and racial identities (heritage, traditions, folklore, etc.),

or in the force of alterity-alteration of the ruptures of art and literature; whether in the

mechanisms of reproduction of the field laws of university culture, or in the lines of flight that

(6)

89 globalizing logic as mediatization in the folds of opaque resistance that disuniforman the

grammar of the market with new poetics of subjectivity (GarcíaCanclini, 1987).

These diverse, and often contrary, accents that cross the series "culture", not only unfold in the

exteriority of the social, but also cross the field of theories and cultural studies that are

responsible for analyzing their movements and transformations under the impact of complex

mutations. (Richard, 2005 cited in Mato, 2001)

On the other hand, the significance of culture acquires, from its axiological intention, a

preponderant role in the political agendas of the Nation States and in the programs of

international organizations such as UNESCO, IDB and the World Bank. In this scenario, it is

recurrent to question: what role does culture play in development? And there is remarkable

evidence to reduce culture to a simple catalyst of economic 'advance' as it is assumed as a

means that can favor or hinder an end. In such a way that the culture from this conception, is

synonymous of dispensable object for the development.

Regarding the relationship between culture and development, thought was transformed in 1970

when UNESCO organized the First World Conference on Cultural Policies with the aim of

promoting a different model of development and advancing, in theoretical terms, what was called

the cultural dimension of the same. This idea has a wrong starting point since it conceives the

terms culture and development as separate areas when they are indissoluble unity. This gap,

which acquires different aspects in the two positions analyzed, also implies a reductionism in the

concept of culture. In the first case, because it is understood as an instrument for development

as economic growth.In the second, because when speaking of "cultural aspects", it is not taken

into account that both development and economy are elements of the culture of a community. It

is then a question of ceasing to assign an instrumental role to culture and to attribute to it a

constitutive, constructive and creative one. Only in this way can we account for development in

human terms, that is, in the multidimensionality of social realization.

However, the aforementioned has not yet recognized the process of spiritual production as

awareness, which is important to define the active role of the social subject. It is necessary to

assess the concept of social production, according to Marxist referents, which represents a living

human activity, a work process that takes place as a result of the joint participation of the

physical and spiritual forces of men. (Tolstyj, 1989) shares this idea, explains social production

(7)

90 consciousness also participates. The author has defined spiritual production as "... the

production of consciousness in a certain social form, or more exactly, the production of the

social form of consciousness". Tolstyj (p122: 1989).

Social production allows us to analyze the integrity of spiritual production within the structure of

social production, since Marx and Engels (p21: 1979) stated that "Spiritual production is the

production of consciousness as manifested in the language of politics, laws, morals and religion,

metaphysics, etc., of a people. "

The concept of spiritual production has been treated by other specialists, G. Nesterenko (1978),

Fabelo. Corso (2012), is a concept structured by its theoretical-methodological value in the

treatment of the relations between the social being and the social conscience, taking into

account the intersubjectivity in the character of the production of knowledge and knowledge.

This is a punctual concept for cultural processes. In a determined historical - concrete situation,

each human being thinks in correspondence with the thought that prevails in society,

subordinating the course of his ideas, to the rules, norms and socially established principles;

there it is present as the independent consciousness, which is proper to each individual,

however, in its development, it acquires an independent form of its individual existence.

The process of spiritual production is aimed at achieving a result, spiritual production is able to

play a mediating role in understanding that interaction between social being and social

consciousness, not only as mere or simple ideological reflection, which can also and it must be

assumed, but from the economic activity, socio - class and political - organizational, intellectual,

cultural, among others. Spiritual production is the sustenance of the culture acquired by the

social subject in its evolution. The transcendental thing is to also perceive culture as the

production of meanings, culture as the meaning of objects, phenomena and processes of social

reality for the human being.

Therefore, we maintain that the development model, as a constituent part of a culture, is the

future project that a community constructs for itself. In the culture are the essential elements that

give foundation and meaning to individuals, which allow them a continuity through time in the

process of recreating themselves and collectively, based on the affirmation and innovation of

their own worldview transmitted and transformed by their ancestors from generation to

generation, through tangible and intangible elements with which they found the route to face or

(8)

91 The starting point that emerges from the conception that culture should not be seen only as a

result or as a product, but as part of a process that is simultaneously individual, family,

community. Today, in various international cultural policy forums, a conception of culture is

affirmed and consolidated, placing it as an essential dimension of development and whose

universal principle is the promotion of cultural rights as a fundamental segment of human rights,

an essential element of new forms of relationships between individuals and communities. The

cultural dimension is not isolated, it is intertwined with other spheres or dimensions of

development in which the economic, the social and the territorial interact.

When the term "development" is associated with the human, individual and / or social

dimension, and is problematized with respect to a group of human beings, at least two different

conceptions of that term emerge: according to the first, development is a process of economic

growth, a rapid and sustained expansion of production, productivity and per capita income

(some qualify this definition by insisting on a wide distribution of the benefits of such growth).

According to the second, elaborated and promoted by the United Nations Development Program

(UNDP, 2001) and by other organizations of the United Nations (UN), such as the United

Nations Organization for Science, Education and Culture (UNESCO) development is conceived

as a process that increases the effective freedom of those who benefit from it to carry out any

activity to which they attribute value. This last idea is linked to a broad, non-economic vision of

development, and is known as human development.

A characteristic of culture is its dynamic nature that is recreated between tradition and

modernity. Culture is not static or invariable, it is dialectical, it requires exchange to remain

within the global concert of cultures that interact globally; thus, each culture is strengthened,

acquires validity, is updated in an incessant search for new ways of creating and innovating.

Therefore, it is a priority to recognize and train the human resources of each community to

strengthen citizen participation in decision-making that affects their lives and defines their future.

Culture generates models of coexistence that will allow us to exist and endure as a collective.

Culture must be understood in a broad way, as a concept of maximum generality: as a principle

of the ends themselves and not as a means to reach one or the other end. Only by taking into

account this double role of culture can we begin to understand development as part of a social

process. From this perspective, all forms of development are determined by cultural factors. It

does not make sense to insist on the dichotomy when establishing the "relationship between

(9)

92 the culture of a community. Culture is the goal and objective of development understood as the

fulfillment of human existence in all its forms and in all its fullness. The development from the

dimension of the cultural, is contribution to enrich the very concept of quality of life and human

development.

Indeed, in all fields of development we see how the importance of culture is now recognized.

Among them, in relation to comparative advantages in the international market, equity, social

capital, educational levels and training; to consolidate the forms of cooperation of traditional or

new cultures for development projects, especially in regional frameworks; and to encourage

linguistic and cultural pluralism in new telecommunications and electronic networks.

In these circumstances, the cultural dimension strengthens its role as a synthesis of the best

human virtues and increasingly assumes the role of conditioning the other dimensions of

development and directly influences the definition of norms and values that guide and organize

the evolution of it.

CONCLUSIONS

Culture as the essence of development is support for the integral personological development

of the social subject, which contributes to the transformation of different economic and social

scenarios. Culture as a core function in development dignifies the human being.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

1. OLMOS, Héctor Ariel (2008): Cultural management and development: keys to

development. Spanish Agency of International Cooperation for Development.http:

//publicaciones.administración.es

2. YÚDICE, George (2006): The resource of culture. The uses of culture in the global era.

Havana: Editorial of Social Sciences.

3. UNESCO (1982): Declaration of Mexico on Cultural Policies. World Conference on

Cultural Policies, Mexico, July 26-August 6.

4. UNESCO / UNDP (2001): Human Development Report at www.pnud.org

5. ZAVARCE, Karina (2010): CSR and cultural action. Perspectives to understand the

Venezuelan case in GUÉDEZ, Víctor (2010), pp. 284-296.

6. OLMOS, Héctor Ariel; and SANTILLÁN GÜEMES, Ricardo (2004): "Cultural management

(10)

93 Identity, policies and cultural management. First National Encounter of Cultural Promoters

and Managers, June 23-26. Zacatecas Cultural Heritage and tourism. Notebooks; pp.

33-44.

7. HART DÁVALOS, Armando (1986): Change the rules of the game, Editorial

LetrasCubanas, La Habana.

8. YUDICE, George, (2002) "American / Latin American Contrapunteo of Cultural Studies".

In Daniel Mato (ed.) Studies and Other Latin American Intellectual Practices in Culture

and Power. CLACSO and CEAP, FACES, Central University of Venezuela, Caracas.

9. WILLIAMS, Raymond. (1982): Culture. Sociology of communication and art. Barcelona:

Paidós.

10. YOUNG, Iris Marion, (2000) Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

11. GARCÍA CANCLINI, Néstor (1987): Cultural policies in Latin America. Mexico: Grijalbo.

12. MATO, Daniel. (Compiler, 2001): Latin American studies on culture and social

transformations in times of globalization. Buenos Aires: Latin American Council of Social

Sciences.

13. Tolstyj I. V. (1989) Spiritual production.Editorial, Social Sciences. Havana. Cuba.

14. Marx, C .; Engels, F. (1979) The German ideology, Political Editor, Havana, Cuba.

15. Nesterenko.G. (1978) Society and the spiritual world of man.Progress Editorial.

16. FabeloCorzo, J. (2012) The formation of moral values. Editorial People and Education.

Havana. Cuba.

17. PÉREZ DE CUELLAR, J., et al, Our creative diversity. Report of the World Commission

on Culture and Development, UNESCO Editions, Mexico, 1996.

18. UNESCO (1982): Declaration of Mexico on Cultural Policies. World Conference on

Cultural Policies, Mexico, July 26-August 6.

19. UNESCO / UNDP (2001): Human Development Report at www.pnud.org

20. RICHARD, Nelly, (2005) "Academic Globalization, Cultural Studies and Latin American

Criticism." In Daniel Mato: Culture, politics and society Latin American perspectives.

Figure

Actualización...

Referencias

Actualización...